G. M.!

This turned out badly.

Overall impression from "first reading":
Page 1: "many" see an "obvious" deviation...
(Why admit that there are "many" who reproach? This immediately strikes a wrong tone and "move"... in favor of the enemies).

Page 2.

"general reorganization of the People's Commissariats, which is inevitably connected"...
("inevitably"? Very avoidably, since NO general reorganization is HAPPENING. And it turns out that the author directs the reader to that "general" which does not exist).

Page 3.
singling out the essential, concentration in large enterprises, etc. ...

"however, one need only think carefully to see that piecemeal is impossible"... "piecemeal work."
(Unproven. It is possible only piecemeal.

One must begin with little, with one case.)

p. 4 ... Extremes are not permissible
(undoubtedly, but academically)
Osadchy in NKVT (already named twice)

"members of Gosplan have to engage continuously (only Osadchy?) in rough work"...
35 - 1 = 34

p. 5...

Fuel... Larin (why cite him without presenting a single figure? Encourages the enemy! Either say nothing about him, speaking of one's own work not in Larin's words, but in one's own and in facts, or

attack him. Any other tactic = certain defeat).

p. 6 "hastily formed a group of workers to combat famine"
(? this is not at all a matter for Gosplan!)

p. 7
p. 8 directives of the Chairman of the STO
(? Which ones? the reader does not know)
VSP + OTK
NKPS... "will probably not fail to make itself felt" (underlined words also work in favor of the enemies). Neopikhanov...
(but what did he do? Not a single clear word.

At least one example. How did he help?

Save money? Uncover an error? Help avoid it? In what specifically?)

pp. 8-9: ... "Tasks"...

Everyone is so fed up with tasks that it is better to say nothing about them. There are countless tasks for everyone.

General, universal, all-embracing tasks, which are clearly not going to be fulfilled.

This turned out badly or did not come off at all. It is better to stay silent in print for now. But for a report to the STO
(.) present clearly something actually achieved, even if only 3-4 examples, small ones but precise, factual, what was achieved, not tasks, concretely carried out, not general and hypothetical.

What did Ramzin do in Petersburg?
" " Neopikhanov in Moscow?

Strumilin
Popov
and others.
(.) Has work been distributed to individual members? When?

How many of the 35?